Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
billion out of medicare and now they want to make cuts to medicare and other entitlements part of the equation to get anything agreed to. we need to reform our social insurance system, particularly in medicare. we did that in the affordable care act and people forget the significant changes of medicare in that law and we ought to be content to let some of those actually play themselves out before we start messing around with something that's so important to 50 million americans. >> i believe you've pointed out in the past the cuts that were made with medicare are the same cuts that the president was attacked for during the election. >> exactly. these are savings, about a third of which were reducing the subsidy for insurance companies providing medicare advantage programs and the rest of them pretty much cut to providers and we didn't reduce services. we expanded some while leaving money over the long term and the cbo said the affordable care act will save $1.2 trillion. again, we need to be careful what we do with the medicare portion of the social safety net because we've act
for previously and i hope they're not going to continue to ask for is essentially the dismantling of medicare. we debated it during the presidential with paul ryan's proposal to put -- turn medicare into a voucher system. so when it comes to looking for savings in medicare, there's ways to find savings without breaking the guarantee that we've had to our seniors for the last several decades. i think democrats, again, have demonstrated repeatedly that we're willing to compromise, but the republicans have to come to the table, especially around revenue. so the question frankly needs to be proposed to the person running the republican caucus, and that's grover norquist, who is not a member of this house, to say that the pledge that people should honor is the pledge to the u.s. constitution and not the pledge to grover norquist. >> speaker boehner was on fox news on sunday, and he says as he described negotiations, we're nowhere, period. we are nowhere. 29 days to go. we have some analysts such as our first read team that say the real negotiations won't begin until mid-november. already you have wall
for. republicans propose 600 billion in entitlement saving including raising the medicare requirement to 67, nearly twice what the white house called for. the gop plan changes how social security benefits are calculated, something addressed under the president's plan. the president today did open the possibility for further negotiations down the road. >> we're not going to be able to come up with a comprehensive tax reform package that gets it all done just in the next two weeks. we're not going to be able to come up with necessarily a comprehensive entitlement reform package in the next two weeks. >> joining me now is congressman adam schiff of california. thank you so much for your time. >> it's a pleasure. >> you heard the president responding again to the proposal from republicans yesterday. what's your gut right now on this? >> my gut is we're going to reach a deal. i don't think we're going over the cliff, but we'll have a hard couple of weeks of negotiating st still ahead of us. i don't envy of position the speaker is, but he has to face the fact his party lost the election and
in cuts to medicare and other entitlements which will take place at a later date, and also about $50 billion in new stimulus spending. republicans are essentially calling it a nonstarter today. majority leader eric cantor said that it's not a serious proposal. as you heard, house speaker john boehner essentially said that this isn't something that we can work with. their main sticking point are the taxes number one, it's about twice what they would be willing to talk about, and also they say entitlement reforms just don't go deep enough. the president is saying show me your plan. this is essentially the president's opening bid. he is feel being emboldened by his re-election. he's also been criticized in the past by democrats who say he hasn't been tough enough during these negotiations. so the company really coming out with a proposal that is clearly being balked at by republicans. but now the white house essentially saying that it is in the republicans' court to make the next move. but right now these negotiations are essentially deadlocked and the clock is ticking. >> all right. kr
about major changes to social security and medicare. you are against it. a new poll shows that 70% are opposed to medicaid spending cuts, 51% oppose raising medicare age. where are you you willing to compromise on entitlements when that part of the conversation is dealt with? >> first of all, social security is not a part of the debt problem. it has its own trust fund. it's well accounted for. it's actuarially sound to 2040 right now. medicare we took care of in the president's bill. in terms of medicaid, there's jostling between the states and the federal government right now, but that's a bigger question that shouldn't be dealt with by the end of the december. that's a bigger question. we've already taken $1.7 trillion in cuts, and the president is put another $800 billion up on the table. i think the democratic side has been very forthcoming in terms the cuts, cuts in a way that will not harm the recovery. zoou for your time. i greatly appreciate you joining us at this point. thank you. both secretary of state hillary clinton and defense secretary leon panetta issued more stern
mainly from medicare, not to mention spending cuts. that figure, at least $1.2 trillion, according to politico. let's bring in news nation political panel. nationally syndicated radio talk show host and msnbc contributor micha michael smir connish. zacha zachary carabel. zachary, as we look at this and what we know so far and the talking points that go back and forth, we haven't got specifics, details from the right. we hear what the left wants. isn't the onus on john boehner and the right to say exactly what they want. >> i think it's on the onus of everybody to give a little in this. everyone talks about the simpson/bowles commission as a template for across the board reductions of long-term spending along with tax increases. that would obviously be ideal. right now we're talking about $2 trillion of spending decreases plus tax cuts, which even though running a trillion dollars of deficits a year, that's over a ten-year period. we're not talking a huge dent in the situation here. granted, any progress is probably better than no progress. but what we are talking about versus the t
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)